Replies

I am sincerely interested in the hard Science of Climate models and both the historical study of our atmosphere and yes, the CO2 modeling. Of greatest interest to me personally is the far and wide ranging predictions and forecasts that have been quoted in the media and indeed, generated by many, many different computer driven models.

Now, according to my sources, temps have risen within a normal range, and we have nothing to fear from rises in CO2, since our planet has been designed to balance out or self-adjust, IMO.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/reg15n2g.html

Richard S. Lindzen

Summary of Scientific Issues:

Before even considering "greenhouse theory,'' it may be helpful to begin with the issue that is almost always taken as a given--that carbon dioxide will inevitably increase to values double and even quadruple present values. Evidence from the analysis of ice cores and after 1958 from direct atmospheric sampling shows that the amount of carbon dioxide in the air has been increasing since 1800. Before 1800 the density was about 275 parts per million by volume. Today it is about 355 parts per million by volume. The increase is generally believed to be due to the combination of increased burning of fossil fuels and before 1905 to deforestation. The total source is estimated to have been increasing exponentially at least until 1973. From 1973 until 1990 the rate of increase has been much slower, however. About half the production of carbon dioxide has appeared in the atmosphere.

Predicting what will happen to carbon dioxide over the next century is a rather uncertain matter. By assuming a shift toward the increased use of coal, rapid advances in the third world's standard of living, large population increases, and a reduction in nuclear and other non-fossil fuels, one can generate an emissions scenario that will lead to a doubling of carbon dioxide by 2030--if one uses a particular model for the chemical response to carbon dioxide emissions. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Working Group I's model referred to that as the "business as usual'' scenario. As it turns out, the chemical model used was inconsistent with the past century's record; it would have predicted that we would already have about 400 parts per million by volume. An improved model developed at the Max Planck Institute in Hamburg shows that even the "business as usual'' scenario does not double carbon dioxide by the year 2100. It seems unlikely moreover that the indefinite future of energy belongs to coal. I also find it difficult to believe that technology will not lead to improved nuclear reactors within fifty years.

Nevertheless, we have already seen a significant increase in carbon dioxide that has been accompanied by increases in other minor greenhouse gases such as methane and chlorofluorocarbons. Indeed, in terms of greenhouse potential, we have had the equivalent of a 50 percent increase in carbon dioxide over the past century. The effects of those increases are certainly worth studying--quite independent of any uncertain future scenarios.

Please carefully consider further study of the:

Max Planck Institute for Meteorology (MPI-M), Hamburg, Germany

Global climate modeling

Scientists:

Group leader: Erich Roeckner (A Lefty Green Party fan - no doubt)

Staff members:

Manik Bali, Jan Baudisch, Luca Bonaventura, Renate Brokopf, Traute Crueger, Monika Esch, Reiner Schnur, Jana Sillmann, Min Wei

General aim

The overall mission is to contribute to the understanding of climate variability from inter-annual to centennial time scales. This comprises the response of the Earth System to both natural and anthropogenic forcing, the role of feedbacks with particular emphasis on the interactions between the physical climate system and the carbon cycle, and the detection and attribution (D&A) of anthropogenic climate change.

http://www.mpimet.mpg.de/en/wissens...dellierung.html

Why don't we discuss why the last ice age ended, and round about 10,000 to 8,000 years ago?

Why did temps rise on average 6 - 7 C

Next, if the last ice age peaked around 15,000 years ago, could this be studied in relation to Co2 levels or in the perspective of other factors?